4 ms·

This risks making about as much sense as “free guns” or “free nuclear weapons”. While we are tolerant about free speech in New Zealand, and indeed we have amaz

This risks making about as much sense as “free guns” or “free nuclear weapons”. While we are tolerant about free speech in New Zealand, and indeed we have amazing access to our politicians, even to the point where the dildo-throwing protestors who targeted the 3rd most powerful politician here was let go immediately. We are, however, rightly intolerant of hate speech, especially speech against a segment of the population. (We do have our share of racist fools, and our media let their own standards slide too far.) Almost every country has laws on the books like this, including the USA.

stcredzero 8y ago
This risks making about as much sense as “free guns” I think the US 2nd Amendment is a great thing. People everywhere should have that absolute degree of freedom. That's certainly not the same thing as "free nuclear weapons." We are, however, rightly intolerant of hate speech, especially speech against a segment of the population. The problem we've seen with this, is that rather tame bog-standard Republican positions in the US are being tarred as "hate speech" by bad actors on the Far Left. (Accompanied by Far Leftist mobs chasing bog-standard Republicans in the street and beating them up. There's video of this to be found on YouTube.) I'm fine with direct incitement being illegal. That's pretty much the same thing as prohibiting explicit threats of physical violence. But there should be a wide zone around any kind of political opinion which isn't direct incitement. Otherwise, without objective standards, everything just devolves into namecalling, trying to get everyone else de-platformed. In 2019, every enforcement mechanism needs to be vetted with the question: Can this be exploited? Because in 2019, you can rest assured that some bad actor will exploit it. Almost every country has laws on the books like this, including the USA. There is no such thing as "Hate Speech" in the US. However, we do have laws against things like direct incitement.
- rhcom2 8y ago
  The 2nd amendment isn't absolute though, which you can see through the different gun laws in each state.
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    The 2nd amendment isn't absolute though, which you can see through the different gun laws in each state. Those are often states being naughty and infringing. Those are often backdoor attempts to circumvent the 2nd amendment.
    - rhcom2 8y ago
      Not according to the Supreme Court, who has upheld the state's right to regulate firearms.
Mirioron 8y ago
>While we are tolerant about free speech in New Zealand, China is also tolerant of free speech when it suits them. I wouldn't consider them a role model though. You can get 10 years in prison for possessing objectionable material, and one criteria for objectionable material basically makes BDSM illegal. >Almost every country has laws on the books like this, including the USA. Countries like the USA have specific protected categories of people that you're not allowed to discriminate by in certain activities, but publications in the US don't have to go through an office of censorship. You can release a movie without the government seeing it first.

stcredzero 8y ago

This risks making about as much sense as “free guns” I think the US 2nd Amendment is a great thing. People everywhere should have that absolute degree of freedom. That's certainly not the same thing as "free nuclear weapons." We are, however, rightly intolerant of hate speech, especially speech against a segment of the population. The problem we've seen with this, is that rather tame bog-standard Republican positions in the US are being tarred as "hate speech" by bad actors on the Far Left. (Accompanied by Far Leftist mobs chasing bog-standard Republicans in the street and beating them up. There's video of this to be found on YouTube.) I'm fine with direct incitement being illegal. That's pretty much the same thing as prohibiting explicit threats of physical violence. But there should be a wide zone around any kind of political opinion which isn't direct incitement. Otherwise, without objective standards, everything just devolves into namecalling, trying to get everyone else de-platformed. In 2019, every enforcement mechanism needs to be vetted with the question: Can this be exploited? Because in 2019, you can rest assured that some bad actor will exploit it. Almost every country has laws on the books like this, including the USA. There is no such thing as "Hate Speech" in the US. However, we do have laws against things like direct incitement.

rhcom2 8y ago
The 2nd amendment isn't absolute though, which you can see through the different gun laws in each state.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  The 2nd amendment isn't absolute though, which you can see through the different gun laws in each state. Those are often states being naughty and infringing. Those are often backdoor attempts to circumvent the 2nd amendment.
  - rhcom2 8y ago
    Not according to the Supreme Court, who has upheld the state's right to regulate firearms.

Mirioron 8y ago

>While we are tolerant about free speech in New Zealand, China is also tolerant of free speech when it suits them. I wouldn't consider them a role model though. You can get 10 years in prison for possessing objectionable material, and one criteria for objectionable material basically makes BDSM illegal. >Almost every country has laws on the books like this, including the USA. Countries like the USA have specific protected categories of people that you're not allowed to discriminate by in certain activities, but publications in the US don't have to go through an office of censorship. You can release a movie without the government seeing it first.